On Jan 29, 2026, at 03:41, John Levine <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> While that is a tour de force of ASCII art (UTF-8 art?) it impresses
> me as exactly what we should *not* do.

The objective needs to be that an RFC is accessible, not that each of the 
renderings we provide be accessible on its own.

The current situation is untenable for accessibility because we render the math 
*before* creating the XML.
That creates high fidelity (at least as long as you have the fonts, which we 
can deliver with the PDF, need to reference from copies controlled by us with 
HTML, and have no control over with TXT), but it loses the *source*.

There is no actual representation of the math in an RFCXML file today!

That needs to be fixed, and I applaud the effort to make the actual math 
available in the RFCXML.

It will then be the HTML that provides the best choices for an accessibility 
environment to provide additional accessible renderings.
(The same kind of choice can be applied to other pieces of rendered structured 
information; call me strange, but my brain would rather read UML source than 
look at Figure 2 in the TXT rendering of RFC 9880-to-be [0].)

(Note that a TXT-rendered formulae can be quite accessible as long as the 
rendering is 1-D; it is the 2-D rendering that breaks access.  I think we 
should nudge the tool providers to get better in doing 1-D renderings, as they 
are pretty much needed for inline math anyway, and in indicating whether there 
is a good 1-D rendering.  Figure 5 of RFC 9438 [1] does rely on 2-D, as do 
several unnumbered pieces of block math, so 1-D is not a panacea.)

The other kind of “accessibility” that is often cited as a goal is access for 
search tools.  It would be good to be able to search for text snippets inside 
the math (which is possible today for TXT but not for HTML/PDF), but there is 
little hope to search for structure like the one in the unnumbered math block 
that follows Figure 2 of RFC 9438 [2].  Again, preserving source to the rescue.

Grüße, Carsten

[0]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/authors/rfc9880.txt#line=469
[1]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9438#figure-5
[2]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9438#figure-2

-- 
rswg mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to